Cited by 93Personality Disorders and PsychopathologyMental Health Treatment and AccessPersonality Traits and Psychology

Attitudes of Staff Towards Patients With Personality Disorder in Community Mental Health Teams

Newton-Howes, Giles, Weaver, Tim, Tyrer, Peter·2008·Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of the present paper was to assess the attitudes of clinicians working with personality disordered patients. Methods: Secondary analysis of the Comorbidity of Substance Misuse and Mental Illness Collaborative (COSMIC) data set was undertaken using a priori hypothesis testing. The null hypothesis was that there would be no measurable difference between the attitudes of mental health professionals toward patients with a clinical diagnosis of personality disorder and those with an instrument-rated diagnosis of personality disorder. The potential confounders of global psychopathology, need, social functioning and documented aggression were assessed as possible reasons explaining a rejection of the null hypothesis. Results: Clinicians believed those with the clinical diagnostic label of personality disorder to be more difficult to manage than personality-disordered patients identified by a research tool who did not carry this label. These attitudes were not explained by the potential confounders of psychopathology, social morbidity or acts of aggression. Conclusions: An awareness of a personality disorder diagnosis is associated with a clinician belief that patients will be harder to manage. Objective measures of potential confounders do not explain why this group should be harder to manage. One explanation of this finding is that the label ‘personality disorder’ is stigmatizing. This may also explain the disparity between clinical and research assessments of personality disorder.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/00048670802119739

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Recent evidence suggests clinicians perceive patients with personality disorders as more difficult, despite objective evidence failing to support this view.

    “recent evidence suggests that clinicians perceive patients with personality disorders as more difficult, despite the objective evidence failing to sup port such a view”

    From Personality disorder: a new global perspective (2010) · cites this paper as [21]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Newton-Howes, G., Weaver, T., & Tyrer, P.
Affiliations
  • Department of Psychological Medicine, Imperial College, St Dunstan's Road, London, W6 8RP, UK
  • Imperial College London (GB)
Venue
Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry
Published
2008-01-01
Volume
42
Issue
7
Pages
572-577
ISSN
  • 0004-8674 (ISSN-L)
  • 1440-1614
OpenAlex
W2162695031
Cited by
93
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 4
FWCI
4.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Middlesex University Research Repository (Middlesex University Of London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute for Health and Care Research (1217194)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
Keywords
personality disorders, clinician attitudes, community mental health teams, diagnostic labels, stigma
MeSH terms
Workforce, Adult, Attitude of Health Personnel, Mental Disorders, Community Mental Health Services, Demography, Female, Humans, Male, Patient Care Team, Patient Compliance, Personality Disorders, Professional-Patient Relations, Surveys and Questionnaires, Stereotyping, Comorbidity, Substance-Related Disorders

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review